data management steering committee (dmsc) wednesday ... · jennifer creighton reported on the...

Data Management Steering Committee (DMSC) Wednesday, October 18th, 2012 (9:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.) In Person at AOC SeaTac Office CALL IN #: (888) 591-2259 pin # for Participants: 288483

AGENDA

1. Call to Order and Introductions Rich Johnson

2. Meeting Minutes Action: Motion to approve the minutes:

February 16 meeting September 26 meeting

Rich Johnson

3. Information Networking Hub (INH) Presentation:

Joel Byford, INH Technical Lead

Soos Creek Consulting

4. Cross Project Schedule Dan Belles

5. Governance Outline Heather Williams

6. JISC Presentation (December 7th) Vonnie Diseth

7. 2013 DMSC Meeting Schedule All

Future Meetings - November 15, 2012, Conference Call, 9:30am to 12:00pm (JISC meets December 7th)

Attachments: 1) September 26, 2012 Draft Minutes

Persons with a disability, who require accommodation, should notify Pam Payne at 360-705-5200 or [email protected] to request or discuss accommodations. While notice 5 days prior to the event is preferred, every effort will be made to provide accommodations, when requested.

February 16, 2012 Data Management Steering Committee Meeting Minutes P a g e | 1

DATA MANAGEMENT STEERING COMMITTEE (DMSC) THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 2012 9:30 A.M. TO 12:05 P.M. AOC SEATAC OFFICE, SEATAC OFFICE CENTER 18000 INTERNATIONAL BLVD., SUITE 1106, SEATAC

DRAFT MEETING MINUTES

Members and Alternates Present: Rich Johnson, Chair, Larry Barker, William Holmes, Frank Maiocco, Cynthia Marr, and Barb Miner.

AOC Staff: Jennifer Creighton, Dan Belles, Bill Burke, Mike Walsh, Heather Williams, and Kathie Smalley.

Call to Order

The meeting minutes for the November 17, 2011 meeting were deemed approved. Rich Johnson noted that this was one of the first face to face meetings held in quite awhile and the committee schedule is on the table for discussion. Mr. Johnson also announced that Jennifer is transitioning into a different role at the AOC, and that Heather Williams is her designated replacement.

Proposed Schedule Change

The purpose of proposing a schedule change is to sync DMSC’s efforts with the JISC meeting schedule which will allow the DMSC to have all project information and be prepared to make recommendations to the JISC (. A proposed schedule was handed out with suggested dates just prior JISC meetings. The committee accepted the proposed schedule.

Open Action Items o Bill Burke to provide the SCDX Inventory of Services that defines all of the SCDX web

services and the Increment each service is scheduled to be delivered. Also, identify which web services are considered bi-directional. (Completed on 3/8/2012)

o DMSC Members to review the list of SCDX Inventory of Services and identify any additional services that they would need to be developed to make the SCDX more useful for their courts. (Follow up due by 4/19/2012)

o Bill Burke to review any additional web services that DMSC members request for submittal to the AOC ITG process. (Follow up dependent on above bullet)

o Cynthia Marr will follow up with Issaquah and Lakewood regarding economies of scale through statewide service level agreements with web services providers. (Follow up due by 3/1/2012)

Accounting Project Update – Jennifer Creighton

Jennifer Creighton reported on the Project Status Bi-Weekly Report. The project is moving along on time; the first set of reports were released in December and second set of reports will be released in February. A timeline was provided with handouts that is basically on an every other month release schedule. The difficulty of the project comes from moving the data from the source


systems into the data warehouse and transforming it in a way that it makes sense for the accounting reports. The first 6 reports on the timeline are staggered based on when the information is going to be available to create them. In August, all of the data will be in the warehouse (transformed) and the AOC will then want to look at the remaining reports and see if they can be released more quickly because the data will already be there.

Mr. Johnson requested that the members go back to their courts and validate they’re getting what they need (from a Superior Court perspective). The available reports were announced via Release Notes to the listservs that use them, AOC’s Kevin Ammons announces through the ITG process, and Mr. Johnson will advise the JISC. Ms. Creighton went on to describe the workgroup’s process for vetting the reports.

Ms. Creighton announced there may be a change coming in reports for larger counties when they have Joint and Several Cases with multiple restitution recipients, due to some of the online programs running out of space and an inability to display all of the information. The Accounting Team hopes to have the information for those reports by August, and will try to fit those reports in without impacting the schedule (to be discussed at the next workgroup meeting).

Data Exchange Update

Vehicle Related Violations (VRV) Data Exchange Status Update – Mike Walsh

Mr. Walsh reported the Vehicle Related Violations project progress to members of the Data Management Steering Committee. VRV on boarding for Tier 1 pilot courts, Lakewood, Issaquah, and Kirkland is nearly complete. Kirkland has been processing VRVs since mid-December. Lakewood and Issaquah are working out the final implementation details with their web services providers. They should be processing tickets in the next few weeks. The committee asked Mr. Walsh to comment on why Kirkland was able to deploy the web services much sooner than Lakewood and Issaquah. Walsh felt that the added complexity of a third party service provider, like Redflex/CodeSmart or ATS, may be creating changes to service level agreements.

Cynthia Marr was going to follow up with Issaquah and Lakewood to determine if economies of scale could be attained by reaching statewide service level agreements with the web services solution providers thereby benefitting all court’s on boarding projects. If it turns out to be an opportunity for process improvement, the DMSC will approach the JISC about the possibility of AOC generating statewide service level agreements for web services with the third party web service providers.

Mr. Walsh reported on the start of the VRV Tier 2 pilot with Fife, Tacoma, and Lynnwood, and the anticipated schedule dates for the JINDEX on boarding activities.

The committee questioned Mr. Walsh about the readiness for AOC to on board additional courts and activities following the conclusion of on boarding the pilot courts; especially in the areas of operational support and transaction capacity. The DMSC wants to have the future VRV courts determined and prioritized into tiers now. The DMSC will work through its representatives to determine what courts are ready to start their on boarding projects. Mr. Walsh stated that AOC would be ready to handle additional courts and that recent upgrades of BizTalk servers and services to support the increased capacity for both JINDEX and AOC


were close to complete. As far as operational readiness, the VRV Pilot will include a plan to transition support from the Project Team to AOC maintenance and operations.

Superior Court Data Exchange (SCDX) Status Update – Bill Burke

Mr. Burke presented the current status of the Superior Court Data Exchange (SCDX) project. The project has completed the development of SCDX Increment 1 which includes the delivery of core data exchange services and (10) SCDX web services. SCDX Increment 1 deliverables are being validated by the AOC project team. This validation is expected to be completed by February 22 and the AOC will then begin Quality Assurance (QA) testing of this increment. Work has begun on SCDX Increment 2. This delivery is expected to be completed by the end of June 2012. Mr. Burke provided a high-level project schedule included with his presentation.

Information Networking Hub (INH) Presentation – Dan Belles

Mr. Belles presented an overview of the Information Networking Hub (INH) program and current status. The overview included a brief history of the INH project, the primary problems (current and future) it is expected to resolve and a high level description of the proposed solution. Mr. Belles also presented information on the INH program components to be built, including data governance and data quality, the data exchange services to be provided and a high level project timeline. Mr. Belles concluded the presentation with a discussion of the INH Program risks, the relationship to the SCDX and SC CMS projects, and concluded with a brief summary of what courts will need to do to use the INH. The DMSC members discussed their role in the INH governance, especially in the area of data governance and data quality. They agreed that further discussion with AOC leadership was needed to clarify their role in the project.

The meeting adjourned at 12:05 p.m.


DATA MANAGEMENT STEERING COMMITTEE (DMSC) WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2012 9:30 A.M. TO 12:10 P.M. AOC SEATAC OFFICE, SEATAC OFFICE CENTER 18000 INTERNATIONAL BLVD., SUITE 1106, SEATAC

DRAFT MEETING MINUTES

Members Present Alternates Present: Rich Johnson, Chair Charlotte Jensen Larry Barker William Holmes Frank Maiocco Cynthia Marr Barb Miner

AOC Staff: Vonnie Diseth (phone) Dan Belles Mike Walsh Heather Williams Kathie Smalley.

Call to Order

The meeting minutes for the February 16, 2012 meeting were held over for approval.

Mr. Kumar Yajamanam, Architecture and Strategy Manager for AOC, presented the Enterprise Information Management Presentation to the DMSC. The three primary objectives: provide AOC’s vision (Goals & Objectives) surrounding data, show how the vision will be executed and present possible engagement roles of the Data Management Steering Committee (DMSC). Mr. Kumar Yajamanam started the presentation by providing the background information for the foundation of data strategy that included Ernst &Young Strategic Plan from 2009, Enterprise Architecture Roadmap, JIS Portfolio Modernization Strategy and JIS Baseline Services. The data strategy revolves around the goal of “Enable All Courts to Share Essential Data”. The strategy recommends a comprehensive alignment of the organization around the goal focusing on people & processes, plans& policies, principles and frameworks, technologies and organizations. The data strategy goal is supported by four primary objectives: Improving data exchanges, improving data quality, modernization of systems, and improving the decision support. These objectives are supported via three initiatives – System Modernization Initiative, Data Exchange Initiative, and Data Quality Initiative. The system modernization initiative is focused on ensuring the modernization of the entire JIS portfolio over next several years. The approach to modernization assumes a mixed portfolio based on Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) and custom-built applications. It is also focused on integration and interoperability with both central and local applications while aligning based on JIS Baseline Services recommendations. There approach also recommends the modernization scope to be based on holistic view of court level portfolio to minimize disruptions to courts. It is also recognized that to succeed in system modernization the courts need to drive standardization for business processes and minimize the variations in configurations. Mr. Yajamanam introduced the “2-2-2 Roadmap” which is to focus on two application portfolio modernizations in two biennia while getting ready for the next two application portfolio


modernization. The expectation in the future would be greatly simplified and distributed database environment. Mr. Joel Byford presented

Data Exchange Initiative: The data exchange initiative leverages technologies that allow systems maintained on proprietary computer platforms to exchange data using cross platform internet technologies and standardized data definitions. Data exchange capabilities have become increasingly more valuable as integration between custom legacy applications and modern off-the-shelf software become the industry norm. The Data Exchange initiative has three active projects:

• Vehicle Related Violations (VRDX) Project • SCOMIS Data eXchange (SCDX) Project • Information Networking Hub (INH)

The initiative is designed to help bridge between the old and new technologies, inter-governmental agencies, and justice partners.

• VRDX offers point to point data exchange between Law Enforcement, Licensing Agencies and the Courts.

• SCDX offers a newer service-oriented technology wrapper around the legacy JIS database. • INH provides a routing hub between the multiple data sources as well as a central data repository.

INH is built to leverage all the data exchanges created for the SCDX project and extend the services to more court systems requesting access to the AOC system’s data. As legacy systems are upgraded or replaced, INH manages the data exchange thereby shielding existing systems from changes to structures and access rules. More details surrounding the Initiative and specifically, the INH project will be scheduled for a later date. Ms. Marcia Marsh presented a very high-level overview of the Data Quality Initiative, touching on areas of responsibility and involvement as well as the general concept of Data Quality processes. Ms. Heather Williams presented the types of decisions that the committee may be asked to decide upon in their future role and next steps. The committee discussed the role of the DMSC and that the data strategy plans fall within the DMSC. The committee requested a future discussion on the data governance structure and for AOC to provide the committee with an outline of the existing court and AOC groups related to data governance. Additionally the committee asked for a more detailed INH presentation. The meeting adjourned at 12:10 p.m.

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE COURTS Information Services Division

Page 1


Page 1

Superior Court Data Exchange (SCDX) Information Networking Hub (INH)

October 18, 2012

Data Exchange Initiative Project Release Plans


Page 2

Introduction Data Exchange Initiative


Page 3

Objectives

Goal Enable All Courts to Share Essential Data

Improve Data

Quality

Improve Data

Integration

Improve Decision Support

Modernize Systems

Governance

System Modernization

Initiative X X X

Data Exchange Initiative X X X X

Data Quality Initiative X X X

Each Initiative Has Multiple Projects


Page 4

JIS

SCOMIS

ACORDS JCS

Etc. CAPS

Current Applications

Data Exchange - Current Environment


Page 5

JIS

ACORDS

JCS

Etc. CAPS

SC-CMS

Current Applications

New Applications

AC-EDMS

SCOMIS

DOL

WSP

Seattle Muni

Pierce County

INH

SCDX

Data Exchange – Future Environment


Page 6

Data Exchange Initiative

• Established With the Following Key Goals: – Improve Data Sharing Across Various Court Systems and Justice

Partners – Enable Transition to New Technologies – Use Open & National Standards for Data Sharing – Simplify and Standardize Cross-Agency Data Sharing.

• Currently Includes Two Active Projects

– Superior Court Data Exchange (SCDX) – Information Networking Hub (INH)


Page 7

Superior Court Data Exchange (SCDX) Project Data Exchange Initiative


Page 8

SCDX Functional Purpose

• Reduces Redundant Data Entry • Allows Counties More Technology

Independence. • Provide Counties More System Integration

Options

Improve Timeliness and Completeness of Information Sharing Across All Courts


Page 9

SCDX Technical Purpose

• Underlying Technology – Web Services Model – National Information Exchange Model (NIEM) – Microsoft BizTalk – IBM Message Queuing for Guaranteed Delivery – Java 3270 Emulation

Provide Modern Technology Access for Legacy SCOMIS Transactions


Page 10

SCDX Conceptual Architecture

County System

System

DB

AOC

SCOMIS

JIS

BizTalk Service Broker

Add Person

Add Civil

Update Charge

Etc.

XML Service API

IBM MQ

Java 3270

Service Interface

State System

System

DB Service Interface


Page 11

SCDX Service/Exchange Inventory

Inventory of Available

Services are Being Compiled


Page 12


Page 13

Information Networking Hub (INH) Project Data Exchange Initiative


Page 14

Overall INH Goals 1. System Integration- Provide standard tools/services

for other systems to access data in legacy AOC systems.

2. Central Record Access - Access statewide court records from a single place.

3. Data Quality Automation – Automate improvement of data contained in court records and resolve potential data conflicts.

4. Centralize State Agency Integration – Provide Single Point for integrating with state agency systems.

5. System Transition Support – Enable systems to evolve and migrate off of legacy data sources.


Page 15

Strategy Principles • Minimize User Impact

• Minimize Impact on Other Systems

• Harmonize with SC-CMS Deployment

• Modernize Information Sharing

• Consolidate View & Access of Statewide Data

• Leverage Prior Project Work Where Possible


Page 16

INH Release Strategy

Release 3 Migration Support

• Add New Services Requested

• Support Internal Application Migration

• Further Support Stakeholder Application Migration

Release 2 Data

Centralization

• Establish an Enterprise Data Repository (EDR)

• Centralize Data Across CMS Systems

• Automate Data Quality Reporting

• Automate Data Cleansing Processes

Release 1 Service

Enablement

• Implement Known Services

• Leverage JIS as Authoritative Data Source.

• Monitor & Baseline Data Quality


Page 17

INH Release Approach

Service Enablement

Data Centralization

Migration Support

Release 1 SC-CMS Ready

Release 2 EDR Deployed

Release 3 Additional Services

Likely to have more interim releases in addition to those

shown here.


Page 18

Release 1 - Goals

1. System Integration- Provide standard tools/services for other systems to access data in legacy AOC systems.






Page 19

Other CMS'

Release 1 - End State

SC-CMS

SC-CMS Data

App

JIS

JIS

SCOMIS

INH

Add Services

Update Services

Get Services

Notification Services

~60 Existing SCDX Services ~25 Additional INH Services


Page 20

Other CMS'

JIS-Dependent Systems

INH

JIS-Dependent Systems Maintained Through Services

JIS

JIS

SCOMIS SC-CMS

SC-CMS Data

App

ACORDS JCS Etc.


Page 21

Release 2 - Goals







Page 22

Other CMS'

Release 2 – End State

SC-CMS

SC-CMS Data

App

JIS

JIS

SCOMIS

INH

EDR

Get Services Data Mgmt. Data Quality

Etc.

Add Services

Update Services

Get Services

Notification Svcs.


Page 23

Release 3 - Goals







Page 24

Other CMS'

Legacy Systems

INH

Release 3 – End State

JIS

JIS

SCOMIS SC-CMS

SC-CMS Data

App

ACORDS JCS Etc.


Page 25

Release/Sub-Project Status Release Design Develop Test Deploy

1 – Service Enablement Complete WIP - -

2 – Data Centralization WIP - - -

3 – Migration Support - - - -

Additional Information • Release 1-Initial Pilot – Service enablement pilot completed to prove out

the first 2 services and confirm design. Lessons learned rolled into design and plans.

• Release 1-Service Enablement – Requirements and design are substantially complete. Developers working through

• Release 2-Data Modeling - Centralized data model being designed to incorporate both old and new CMS data structures. Plan to present draft model at a future DMSC.


Page 26

Cross-Project Dependencies

JISC Proper

Data Management Steering Committee

(DMSC)Codes Committee

(CC)Data Dissemination Committee (DDC)

Significant Impacts to

Scope, Schedule,

Budget

Project Steering Committee

AOC Internal Steering

Committee / Project Sponsors

Superior Court Case Management

System Project (SC-CMS)

Information Networking Hub

(INH)

Superior Court Data Exchange

(SC-DX)

TBDCode Changes or

New Codes

Escalated Decisions from AOC Project

Sponsors and CUWGTBD


Scope, Schedule, Budget

Multi-Jurisdictional Data Decisions Escalated from Project Steering

Committee

NoneCode Changes or New Codes

Scope, Schedule, Budget within project

tolerances

Decisions/issues on Data Dissemination

Escalated Decisions from AOC Project Sponsors and PM


Scope, Schedule,

Budget

Multi-Jurisdictional Data Decisions Escalated from Project Steering

Committee

Code Changes or New Codes

Decisions/issues on Data Dissemination None

Data Governance

Court User Workgroup

(CUWG) Sub-workgroups and User Groups

Approve Data Strategy-

Mission, Goals, Metrics, Plan

Data Quality



tolerances

Business Process Decisions (non-

critical path decisions)

Workgroup specific recommendations

as needed

Scope, Schedule, Budget decisions

within project tolerances

None



Approve and Monitor, Communications,

Resolution of Issues, Oversee Data Governance




TBD

Brings User Issues Forward, Assesses

Impact, Recommends and

Advises

Delineates Stewardship Roles, Reports Activities

and Issues

Approve Data Quality Metrics,

Significant Impacts to Scope, Schedule, Budget

Approve and Monitor Data Quality Strategy,

Data Policy, Standards & Procedures

Approves Code Changes and Identifies Data Quality Code-Related Issues

Communicates Data Quality-Related

Issues Specific to Data Dissemination

Monitors and Approves Data Quality-Related Project Strategy

TBD

Advises and Tests Based on Specific

Data Quality Projects and Issues

Workgroups Specific to DQ Area: i.e. Data Standards/Metadata,

DQ Technical, DQ Certification

Data – Centric IT Projects


Scope, Schedule,

Budget

Multi-Jurisdictional Data Decisions





tolerancesTBD



Non-Data Centric IT Projects


Scope, Schedule,

Budget

Multi-Jurisdictional Data Decisions

Escalated from Project Steering Committee





tolerancesTBD

Workgroup specific recommendations as

needed

JISC

Project / Program Level



Workgroup specific recommendations

as needed


needed


needed



Decisions within program/project

tolerances

Decisions within program/project

tolerances

http://extranetdev.courts.wa.gov/index.cfm?fa=controller.showPage&folder=jisProjects/sccms&file=news&newsID=660




Data Management Steering Committee (DMSC)

Codes Committee (CC)

Data Dissemination Committee (DDC)

Project Steering Committee

AOC Internal Steering

Committee / Project Sponsors

Data Integration Workgroup

Court User Workgroup (CUWG)

Data Workgroups & AOC Business Units

Architectural Review Team

Center for Court Research

Reporting & Query Team

Data Standards Advisory Workgroup

Data Quality Technical Team

Data Stewards

Data Privacy & Security Team

JISC

Project / Program Level

Business Intelligence Workgroup

Database Design Team

Data Exchange Workgroup

LegendOrange Fill = Court/AOC involvement

Green Fill = AOC internal GroupPurple Fill = Association workgroups

Gray Fill = proposed but not yet implemented

JCS User Workgroup

(juvenile court issues)

Data Quality Coordination Team

Project Workgroups (as needed per subject matter)

Draft 1.1 Updated 10/15/12

Local CMS Policy Workgroup

JIS Baseline Services

Workgroup

JCA Software Committee

(juvenile court issues)

WSACC Report & Query Workgroup

(clerk issues)

Accounting Workgroup

Juvenile Report & Query Workgroup (juvenile issues)

Data Quality Certification and

Audit Group

data management steering committee (dmsc) wednesday ... · jennifer creighton reported on the...

Documents